h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

actually it made jus t enough sense to re-enfore the point nicely

To Zagreb -

Can you please explain to me why you considered the War on Iraq to be legally justified ?

Imagine I'm an ICC Judge - I know America hasn't (for whatever reason) signed up - just humour me.

Is the war was so right (morally and legally), why does GB and Blair STILL have so much trouble clearly stating, with a minimum of continuity, the REAL reasons why they invaded Iraq.

"How can a term so young be called classic so soon. Zagreb (he who seems to be obsessed with the sixth form) if you're honest with yourself you have to see that "anti-American" is just a labell used on anyone who dissagrees with what the US govt is doing at the time."

"Anti-American" is hardly a young term. It was probably used as early as 1776.

For me, Anti-American can mean an attitude that takes an exception to Americans doing something that it has no problems with other countries doing.

For example, right now France effectively controls the African nation of Cote D'Ivorie, thanks to military occupation. Where are the marches against French occupation? But you can bet American actions of a similar type (ie Iraq) would bring people out in their droves.

Anti-American would also apply, of course, to those who openly simply hate Americans.

"For me, Anti-American can mean an attitude that takes an exception to Americans doing something that it has no problems with other countries doing."

The first obvious problem is that you make no obvious or otherwise distinction when using that term.

By your first definition much of your posts are dismissive and rude. Like in the ICC thread (much pre Iraq) where you accused anyone who didn't like Bush as a supporter of everything Clinton did and you used, by way of example, a missile strike ordered by him.

that definition is just as stupid as saying that dissagreeing with bombing afghanistan equated to supporting terrorism. Not supporting one doctrine does not mean that one automatically supports another or another purveyor.

"Anti-American would also apply, of course, to those who openly simply hate Americans."

This definition is as stupid as the term "american bashing" and used by anyone unable to support thier own argument.

You were less sinister when I thought you just had questionable patriotism.

Apparition,

All I did was defined (roughly) what I felt constituted anti-American thinking. At no point did I say "and this is how *insert name here* thinks!". Why are you insinuating that I did?

"By your first definition much of your posts are dismissive and rude. Like in the ICC thread (much pre Iraq) where you accused anyone who didn't like Bush as a supporter of everything Clinton did and you used, by way of example, a missile strike ordered by him."

I did say I thought Clinton was rubbish at dealing with the terrorists, I don't remember saything that anyone who didn't like Bush (I don't like Bush, incidentally, I just think he's taking action the Democrats should have taken) was therefore a supporter of Clinton's foreign and war policy.

"You were less sinister when I thought you just had questionable patriotism."

Sinister? Please! I wouldn't even describe myself as a Patriot with a capital "P" (and I'm Scottish, not American, and Scotland is very anti-war) sometimes I like my country, sometimes it pi**es me off and I feel ashamed to be associated with it (see the Section 28 furore in Scotland for details). Without wanting to be rude, you've accused me of all this black/white blinkered thinking and then pretty much thrown the same back at me.

All I can say to that is that your memory is either short of selective.

"I wouldn't even describe myself as a Patriot with a capital "P"" Patriotism with a capital P is Nationalism.

that should be *or* not "of"